The ongoing conflict within the MAGA movement escalated when former President Trump failed to persuade Indiana Republicans to modify their congressional districts. Is Trump’s influence in the political arena beginning to wane?
Politico suggests that this could be a sign of trouble:
Trump’s lack of influence is evident across various aspects of his domestic agenda. The only area where his call to end the filibuster has garnered support is in Republican primaries. Congress dismissed his health care proposal before it could be effectively launched. His boat strikes off Central and South America are now facing congressional oversight. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is openly rebelling against him. He also backed down regarding the release of the Epstein files after putting up resistance for months. His proposal for $2,000 tariff checks for Americans seems as improbable as his DOGE checks. Furthermore, his candidate for Miami mayor lost, resulting in a Democrat winning the office for the first time in nearly three decades. Even his selected chair of the Republican National Committee forecasts a “pending disaster” in the midterms, although he maintains that Trump is the only one who can salvage the Republicans. As of now, only 31 percent of Americans approve of his economic handling; voters are facing financial strain, while he claims the economy is “A+++++.” The expiration of ACA subsidies may also pose challenges for him.
Overall, Trump’s influence appears to be at a low point.
Trump Suffered a Major Setback in Indiana
Indiana has emerged as a battleground within the MAGA civil war, with Trump urging the state’s Republicans to assist him in avoiding a midterm disaster in 2026 through the redrawing of GOP districts.
Paul Blumenthal provided insight into the situation in Indiana for Huffington Post:
A group of twenty-one Republicans in the Indiana state Senate defied President Trump’s pressure campaign for new congressional maps that would have eliminated two Democrat-held House seats in the state.
Trump’s embarrassing defeat occurred after he utilized every tool at his disposal to influence the state Senate. He issued numerous social media threats aimed at GOP Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray and others who opposed the redistricting, warning them of primary challenges. Vice President J.D. Vance made several visits to persuade lawmakers, while White House deputy chief of staff James Blair and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) personally urged state senators to alter their votes.
The pressure campaign reached its peak when Heritage Action, the political arm of the Heritage Foundation, publicly claimed that Trump had threatened to withdraw all funding if the Senate did not support redistricting. Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith, a Republican and strong supporter of the redistricting effort, confirmed this in a now-deleted post on X.
This overt attempt to intimidate resulted in threats and hostile actions against GOP state senators who resisted the campaign.
CNN recounted a particularly striking instance:
Jean Leising spoke at a breakfast event at her grandson’s school this fall, and hours later, when she was picking him up from basketball practice, he shyly mentioned that his entire team received unfavorable text messages about her that day. Reflecting on this moment shortly after she joined her fellow Republican state senators in rejecting Trump’s redistricting push, Leising remarked that while she laughed it off at the time, it ultimately led to her opposition against the president.
“When I got home that night, that’s when I decided,” stated Leising, a 76-year-old former senator. “I was angry. So the next day, I talked about this because it’s unacceptable.”
“And that was only the beginning,” she added. “It only escalated from there.”
A recent tweet by Vice-POTUS J.D. Vance, subtly addressing Donald Trump Jr., illustrates the ongoing MAGA conflict in Indiana:
Rod Bray, the Senate leader in Indiana, has consistently told us he wouldn’t fight redistricting while simultaneously urging his members against it. That level of dishonesty cannot be rewarded, and the Indiana GOP needs to choose a side. https://t.co/63Vg7qkpDg
— JD Vance (@JDVance) December 11, 2025
Ultimately, this pressure campaign backfired, resulting in a majority of the 40 GOP state senators voting against the effort. Given Trump’s victory in Indiana by a substantial margin in 2024, this represents a serious blow to his influence.
As if that weren’t enough, there are concerns that he may also fall short in Texas.
Texas Redistricting Missteps?
The New York Times provided further details in their article titled, “Did Texas Republicans Overplay Their Hand on Redistricting?”:
In the summer, Texas Republicans modified the state’s congressional map aiming to flip five seats currently held by Democrats, guided by indications of rightward shifts among voters. However, with Hispanic voters showing signs of discontent with Trump in recent elections and rising cost-of-living concerns, Democrats believe they might retain as many as three of the newly drawn seats in Texas, particularly in the Rio Grande Valley and possibly another in the San Antonio area. The party is also eyeing a potential flip of a Republican seat in the Valley, which remains largely unchanged in its partisan alignment, where a popular Tejano music star is running as a moderate Democrat.
In summary, the redistricting battles appear to be stalled and currently seem to have negatively impacted Trump, as they have contributed to the escalating MAGA civil war. It also indicates that Trump is no longer in a position to manipulate district boundaries in a way that can save the GOP House majority in 2026.
Meanwhile, revelations about the chaotic inner workings of Trump’s administration are continuing to shed light on the contributing factors to the MAGA civil war.
Barron Trump Assists the Tates
The New York Times featured a story last week detailing an unusual situation linked to Trump 2.0.
For those unfamiliar with Andrew Tate, he is a well-known figure in the “manosphere,” currently under investigation in Romania for a host of serious allegations, including coercing women, rape, and assault involving a minor.
The article describes how he was able to secure assistance from Trump:
Romanian prosecutors received directives to reach a compromise with the Tates, and although they were reluctant, they decided to lift travel restrictions in an attempt to placate the Trump administration. Their arrival in the U.S. created a rift among conservatives and raised questions about whether there had been any White House intervention.
The piece elaborates on the brothers’ unconventional media and lobbying strategies:
As Andrew Tate’s notoriety grew, he strategically engaged with media stars like Tucker Carlson, leveraging their connections to amplify his own reach. Andrew also cultivated relationships with Donald Trump Jr. and Barron, who recognized the significance of appealing to young male voters in their father’s potential return to power.
Barron, now 19, was impressed by Andrew and had a conversation with him via Zoom last year. They discussed their mutual belief that the Romanian legal case was an attempt to silence the Tates. Following Trump’s re-election, some of the Tates’ supporters secured positions in the new administration, and one such supporter, diplomatic envoy Richard Grenell, engaged in discussions regarding their case with Romanian officials. Within days of a follow-up conversation, the Romanian prosecutors received instructions to grant the Tates permission to travel. This outcome alarmed several American diplomats, who expressed concerns about the implications for U.S. foreign relations, and triggered backlash from traditional conservatives who labeled it as a manifestation of toxic masculinity. Some even compared the Tates to the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
This episode illustrates the type of conduct that Trump might have previously navigated without issue, but it also serves as a reminder that fractures within his coalition were surfacing earlier than anticipated.
At the same time, key insiders in the Trump 2.0 administration have been actively participating in Trump’s battles against the financial establishment and federal bureaucracy.
Russell Vought’s Key Ally Takes on the Federal Reserve
It has been some time since I last discussed Russell Vought, who serves as the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and holds acting leadership positions at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
Vought’s extensive responsibilities make him a significant figure in Trump’s administration. As such, Politico’s profile of Mark Paoletta, Vought’s legal advisor, is essential reading.
Trump’s second administration is populated by a mix of outspoken figures like Elon Musk and quieter but equally disruptive individuals like Vought and Paoletta, whose long-term objectives pose substantial threats to the status quo.
After Musk’s recent setbacks, it is clear that Vought and Paoletta are potentially the more dangerous elements moving forward.
The Politico article on Paoletta delves into specific actions he’s taken while under Vought’s leadership, but we should concentrate on his role within the MAGA civil war:
Paoletta has promoted expansive views of presidential authority over Congress, including authoring a memo just a week after the inauguration that mandated a halt on all federal spending. Though the memo was promptly retracted, it created a significant uproar among various agencies and foreshadowed upcoming disputes over federal expenditures. When Trump intensified pressure on the Federal Reserve over the summer, Paoletta drafted a letter from Vought to Jerome Powell, indicating that the Federal Reserve Chair was not adhering to the approved renovation plan for the Federal Reserve’s Washington, DC headquarters.
Given Trump’s disdain for Powell, whose 2017 appointment he blames on “bad advice” from then Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, I’m sure this pleased those at the top.
However, we should take a step back and consider the broader developments in the ongoing MAGA civil war, which is largely driven by media figures outside the administration.
MAGA vs. MIGA Gains Media Attention
Earlier in November, I shared insights on “America First vs. Israel First” and “TACO MIGA Breaking from MAGA Over the Epstein Files.” Now the mainstream media is starting to catch up.
The New York Times reports on Tucker Carlson’s recent critiques of his adversaries within the right:
In his appearance on “This Past Weekend with Theo Von,” posted on Tuesday, Carlson — a longtime ally of Trump — unleashed harsh personal attacks on Bari Weiss, the new head of CBS News, and billionaire Bill Ackman, a key supporter of Trump, disparaging their intellect and qualifications. He also expressed skepticism about the FBI’s investigation into Mr. Kirk’s murder.
Carlson noted that the leadership of the country consists not only of bad people but also of completely unimpressive, unintelligent figures. He stated, “The most depressing thing about the United States in 2025 is that we’re led not just by bad people, but by mediocre, totally uncreative individuals.” He further discussed the ongoing debate surrounding the Epstein files, expressing support for figures like Ms. Owens and questioning the official narrative, while implying a lack of confidence in the FBI and its leadership.
Carlson also targeted Bari Weiss, CBS News’ new head, who was appointed by Trump ally David Ellison:
Carlson’s remarks about Weiss followed a clip of her asserting that he was “anti-American and anti-Jewish.” In response, Carlson labeled Weiss “an idiot,” dishonest, and unqualified for her position, adding, “No fair system, no ‘meritocracy’ would allow Bari Weiss to rise above secretary.”
Carlson appeared to align with Trump’s critics within Congress, expressing approval for Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Representative Thomas Massie:
Carlson’s comments seemed to distance himself from Trump, as he commended both Greene and Massie as some of the “only honest members of Congress” and praised their sincerity.
He also indirectly criticized Trump for his stance on Israel, stating, “I love Trump personally. I still love him personally. But it felt like that election was about ‘We’ve had enough of this.’”
Politico Analyzes the MAGA Civil War’s Influence on 2028
Ian Ward of Politico published an extensive piece delving into the roots of “the dispute regarding the GOP’s support for Israel amidst rising antisemitism” by interviewing figures like Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson, and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
The emergence of this rift coincided with the Gaza conflict, but it’s no mere accident of history. It reflects the efforts of a particular group of conservative critics of Israel, who have aimed to bring the debate to the forefront of the MAGA dialogue. They argue that they are driven by a desire to address the contradiction between Trump’s “America First” philosophy and the U.S.’s continued support for Israel. Conversely, critic voices assert that these figures engage in an antisemitic bid, capitalizing on the fallout of the conflict to marginalize pro-Israel conservatives within MAGA. Some leading anti-Israel voices claim to have the support of Trump, who, while affirming his backing for Israel, has allowed vocal critics of Israel to remain part of the MAGA movement. The evolving landscape presents a new faction within the 21st-century American right: a bloc of anti-Israel conservatives positioned within the Republican mainstream.
The article further addresses the legacy of figures like Pat Buchanan in shaping this ideological shift:
If Mills successfully adapts Buchananism as the standard ideology of the MAGA youth activist class, questions akin to those surrounding Buchanan will arise: can the GOP embrace this perspective without also becoming more amenable to antisemitic individuals like Fuentes?
Increasing evidence suggests that it cannot.
While the article is informative and well-researched, its examination of the 2028 landscape, Generation Z’s influence, and the future of the GOP is particularly compelling.
Ward quoted Marjorie Taylor Greene concerning her political ambitions:
Greene appears to be positioning herself for a potential future presidential run in 2028, although she has publicly denied such plans. However, during our discussion, she alluded to broader aspirations. When asked about seizing upon declining support for Israel among Gen Z conservatives, she suggested that this generation might be turning away from the two-party system. She stated, “I think Gen Z views the two-party system as a total failure, and they harbor disdain for both sides for various reasons. They are radically pro-America. I am wholeheartedly in favor of their views.”
Ward’s analysis portrays the evolving GOP presidential landscape through the lens of MAGA versus MIGA concepts (though without using the latter term):
The anti-Israel faction on the right will become increasingly prominent in the next election cycle. Trump has recognized this changing dynamic, maintaining his support for Israel while occasionally acknowledging the tension between steadfast alliances and his “America First” ethos. This nuanced position will pose challenges for potential successors seeking to replicate it, as the contest for the definitive MAGA stance on Israel is already influencing the emerging Republican field. Cruz, rumored to be preparing for a bid, has seized the opportunity to critique Carlson regarding the Fuentes interview, positioning himself as a leader of pro-Israel Republicans. Bannon has indicated his own intentions to run, positioning himself as an advocate for Israel skeptics, predicting a significant shift in financial contributions from organizations like AIPAC ahead of the 2028 primary season. Vance finds himself caught in between, defending his pro-Israel stance while maintaining relationships with anti-Israel figures such as Carlson and Bannon.
Regardless of the outcome in 2028, nearly all conservatives I spoke with—including pro-Israel supporters—acknowledge that the rise of the anti-Israel right has fundamentally transformed the right’s political atmosphere.
Was Elon Musk’s Epstein Tweet the Turning Point?
To conclude, I want to highlight an observation regarding the most recent polling for Trump:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) December 15, 2025
Notably, Trump’s declining numbers align closely with Elon Musk’s since-deleted tweet from June 5, in which he alleged that the former president is implicated in the Epstein files:
Time to drop the bombshell: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That’s the real reason they haven’t been released.
Have a nice day, DJT!
It appears that Donald Trump’s second term may have already paid the price in the ongoing MAGA civil wars.
